Literature DB >> 12507045

Far bias on the radial line bisection task: measuring perceptual-attentional and motor-intentional bias in normal subjects.

Anna M Barrett1, J Brent Crosson, Gregory P Crucian, Kenneth M Heilman.   

Abstract

Normal subjects usually err distally when bisecting radial lines below eye level in midsagittal space (far bias). To learn if a radial line bisection bias may be characterized as primarily perceptual-attentional or primarily motor-intentional, we had subjects bisect lines while watching their hand and the line under two video monitoring conditions. In the DIRECT condition, proximal (near) and distal (far) on the video monitor corresponded with the workspace where subjects bisected lines. In the INDIRECT condition, we reversed proximal and distal as they appeared on the monitor. Thus, in the indirect condition, distal hand movement appeared proximal, and vice versa. In the DIRECT condition, subjects erred toward far space (mean 2.075 mm). In the INDIRECT condition, however, subjects erred proximally (mean 1.59 mm, near bias). Distal-proximal reversal of errors over the group of subjects is consistent with a primarily perceptual-attentional bias. In lower body space, normal visual-perceptual-attentional systems may be more biased toward far space than are kinesthetic-motor systems.

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12507045     DOI: 10.1016/s0010-9452(08)70043-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cortex        ISSN: 0010-9452            Impact factor:   4.027


  8 in total

1.  Hemispheric asymmetries in perceived depth revealed through a radial line bisection task.

Authors:  Ancrêt Szpak; Nicole A Thomas; Michael E R Nicholls
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2015-12-08       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Line copying: distinct "where" and "aiming" spatial bias in healthy adults.

Authors:  Priyanka P Shah; Keith O Gonzalez; A M Barrett
Journal:  Cogn Behav Neurol       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 1.600

3.  Perceptual-attentional and motor-intentional bias in near and far space.

Authors:  John P Garza; Paul J Eslinger; Anna M Barrett
Journal:  Brain Cogn       Date:  2008-04-01       Impact factor: 2.310

4.  Clock drawing in spatial neglect: a comprehensive analysis of clock perimeter, placement, and accuracy.

Authors:  Peii Chen; Kelly M Goedert
Journal:  J Neuropsychol       Date:  2012-03-05       Impact factor: 2.864

5.  Prism adaptation differently affects motor-intentional and perceptual-attentional biases in healthy individuals.

Authors:  Paola Fortis; Kelly M Goedert; Anna M Barrett
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2011-06-01       Impact factor: 3.139

6.  Spatial bias and right hemisphere function: sex-specific changes with aging.

Authors:  Peii Chen; Kelly M Goedert; Elizabeth Murray; Karen Kelly; Shpresa Ahmeti; Anna M Barrett
Journal:  J Int Neuropsychol Soc       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 2.892

7.  Is it what you see, or how you say it? Spatial bias in young and aged subjects.

Authors:  Anna M Barrett; Catherine E Craver-Lemley
Journal:  J Int Neuropsychol Soc       Date:  2008-07       Impact factor: 2.892

8.  Hemispheric Asymmetries in Radial Line Bisection: Role of Retinotopic and Spatiotopic Factors.

Authors:  Sergio Chieffi; Giovanni Messina; Ines Villano; Antonietta Messina; Ciro Rosario Ilardi; Marcellino Monda; Monica Salerno; Francesco Sessa; Maria Pina Mollica; Gina Cavaliere; Giovanna Trinchese; Fabiano Cimmino; Paolo Murabito; Angela Catapano; Vincenzo Monda
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2018-11-12
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.